Why Are Obama's Critics So Dumb?

[RWS]

Next to that, the most "radical leftist" thing he's done is propose "the Buffett Rule" which will only raise taxes for the richest 2% of the country. 98% of the country's taxes remain the same. I know I'm in the 98%, and I'd venture to say that probably everyone on this board is as well. If you make over a million dollars a year, then you have reason to be unhappy with this tax plan. Basically, all this is is a reversal of the Bush tax cuts (which Obama extended in 2010). We're not talking the People's Republic of China here.

I'm not one of those 2% making $1 million or more a year. But my whole problem with that bill was they wanted to keep everybody the same, except one group, and raise their taxes 4.5% because, well, they make what we consider "too much money". So, hes basically saying that Bush's tax bill was just fine; except for these people who make alot of money. Just because they make over $1 million a year doesn't mean they should magically shoulder the burden of the highest tax IMO. Especially when they more than likely aren't the ones using taxpayer programs such as food stamps, etc. Personally, I would like to see the math that was used to calculate that magic $1 million dollar dividing line.

If they were going to raise everybody's taxes, then whatever. That's one thing. But he singled out one single tax bracket and sent the message that they were going to bear the cross for the country, while leaving cuts in place for everybody else. Why should they be victims of their own success? It's sending the message that we want people to be successful. But if you're too successfull, well, you're going to get fucked.

Bottom line, I think you either raise everybody's taxes, lower everybody's taxes, or leave it the fuck alone. 

[AUChizad]

I'm not one of those 2% making $1 million or more a year. But my whole problem with that bill was they wanted to keep everybody the same, except one group, and raise their taxes 4.5% because, well, they make what we consider "too much money". So, hes basically saying that Bush's tax bill was just fine; except for these people who make alot of money. Just because they make over $1 million a year doesn't mean they should magically shoulder the burden of the highest tax IMO. Especially when they more than likely aren't the ones using taxpayer programs such as food stamps, etc. Personally, I would like to see the math that was used to calculate that magic $1 million dollar dividing line.

If they were going to raise everybody's taxes, then whatever. That's one thing. But he singled out one single tax bracket and sent the message that they were going to bear the cross for the country, while leaving cuts in place for everybody else. Why should they be victims of their own success? It's sending the message that we want people to be successful. But if you're too successful, well, you're going to get fucked.

Bottom line, I think you either raise everybody's taxes, lower everybody's taxes, or leave it the fuck alone.

I mean, that's what tax brackets are for.

Lower taxes, in general, is better in my opinion. And I don't want to see a gross inequity in percentages (like the bottom 10% paying 1% tax, and the top 10% paying 75% or something crazy like that). But you do realize how tax brackets work, right? For example, using simplified figures as a hypothetical, if Joe the Plumber files single and makes $8,000 a year, he pays 10% of that $8,000 in taxes. If Uncle Pennybags files single and makes $1,000,000, he gets taxed 10% of the first $8,000, 15% from $8,000 to $35,000, 25% of $35k to 80k, 28% of $80k to $170k, 33% of $170k to $370k, and then 35% of the income he makes over $370k. He's not charged 35% of the full million.

And Obama didn't invent the tax bracket system.

As mentioned, as of now, he continued the Bush tax cuts, which were intended to be temporary.

I'm all for lowering taxes overall, and even evening out the brackets to be closer to a flat tax. But a pure flat tax, while I love in theory, isn't really fair in practice.

Going to a flat tax would, ironically, be considered extremely radical (to the right). Far more radical than anything Obama has actually done.

[Kaos]

Tax brackets are stupid. 

Paying 35% of your income is ridiculous no matter how much you make. 

You should never give more to the government than you give to God.  10%.  That's it. 

Taxes offend my sensibilities.  Taxes at that level certainly do. 

Most of you don't understand who "the rich" really are. 

Business owners get R.A.P.E.D.     You're an LLC or a S-Corp and all the profits from the business (paper profits, BTW, not actual cash money) get pushed to the individual tax returns. 

So if a business owner's "income" for IRS purposes is $800,000, for instance, the fact that he actually only pays himself $90k as an example is irrelevant.  And the fact that when things are lean he pays himself last also matters not.   

So at the end of the year when he's poured money into salaries, product development, equipment, benefits, building expenses, travel, entertainment, research and whatthefuckallelse, some accountant takes those numbers throws them in a jiggereydo and tells mr. businessman he "made" 800k.  And that's what goes on his personal return. 

VIOLA!!  He's the evil rich.  Even though he might have less disposable income than a guy working a factory job living alone and making 40k, he's the evil rich. 

FUCK YOU,  Obama.  distrubute your own damn money and leave mine alone. 

[Vandy Vol]

Business owners get R.A.P.E.D.     You're an LLC or a S-Corp and all the profits from the business (paper profits, BTW, not actual cash money) get pushed to the individual tax returns. 

So if a business owner's "income" for IRS purposes is $800,000, for instance, the fact that he actually only pays himself $90k as an example is irrelevant.  And the fact that when things are lean he pays himself last also matters not.

So at the end of the year when he's poured money into salaries, product development, equipment, benefits, building expenses, travel, entertainment, research and whatthefuckallelse, some accountant takes those numbers throws them in a jiggereydo and tells mr. businessman he "made" 800k.  And that's what goes on his personal return.

I see what you're trying to say, but how you said it is actually incorrect.

LLCs and S-Corporations are pass through entities.  Thus, the income that the "business" earns is actually self-employment income for the individual.  It's no different than getting paid to do work by yourself without a business entity.

For example, if you fixed lawnmowers on the side, didn't have an entity formed for your side business, and someone paid you $150 to replace an idler pulley, you can't tell the I.R.S. that you made $150 in income, but that you're deducting $150 in "wages" that you paid yourself.  If an individual, LLC, or S-Corporation could do that, then they would have virtually no taxable income ever.

However, if an LLC or S-Corporation pays someone other than the owner(s), or in the case of an S-Corporation if the owner(s) legitimately performed the work of an employee, then you can deduct those payments as wages to employees.  An owner of an LLC can never be considered an employee of the LLC, but an owner of an S-Corporation can be considered an employee of the corporation.

So, if a business owner is paying wages to employees, they can be deducted on the business's return.  This reduces the amount of income that is passed through to the business owner.  Just as a real life example, our business expenses (including wages) are reported on our LLC's Form 1065 as deductible business expenses.  This reduces the amount of income that the firm reports earning, and thus reduces the amount of income that is distributed to each member via a K-1.  If the firm earns $800,000, yet has $500,000 in business expenses, $800,000 is not reported to the owners via the K-1; rather, only $300,000 is reported to the owners via the K-1.

[AWK]

Tax brackets are stupid. 

Paying 35% of your income is ridiculous no matter how much you make. 

You should never give more to the government than you give to God.  10%.  That's it. 

Taxes offend my sensibilities.  Taxes at that level certainly do. 

Most of you don't understand who "the rich" really are. 

Business owners get R.A.P.E.D.     You're an LLC or a S-Corp and all the profits from the business (paper profits, BTW, not actual cash money) get pushed to the individual tax returns. 

So if a business owner's "income" for IRS purposes is $800,000, for instance, the fact that he actually only pays himself $90k as an example is irrelevant.  And the fact that when things are lean he pays himself last also matters not.   

So at the end of the year when he's poured money into salaries, product development, equipment, benefits, building expenses, travel, entertainment, research and whatthefuckallelse, some accountant takes those numbers throws them in a jiggereydo and tells mr. businessman he "made" 800k.  And that's what goes on his personal return. 

VIOLA!!  He's the evil rich.  Even though he might have less disposable income than a guy working a factory job living alone and making 40k, he's the evil rich. 

FUCK YOU,  Obama.  distrubute your own damn money and leave mine alone.

It's true, my butt gets sore...

[Kaos]

I see what you're trying to say, but how you said it is actually incorrect.

LLCs and S-Corporations are pass through entities.  Thus, the income that the "business" earns is actually self-employment income for the individual.  It's no different than getting paid to do work by yourself without a business entity.

For example, if you fixed lawnmowers on the side, didn't have an entity formed for your side business, and someone paid you $150 to replace an idler pulley, you can't tell the I.R.S. that you made $150 in income, but that you're deducting $150 in "wages" that you paid yourself.  If an individual, LLC, or S-Corporation could do that, then they would have virtually no taxable income ever.

However, if an LLC or S-Corporation pays someone other than the owner(s), or in the case of an S-Corporation if the owner(s) legitimately performed the work of an employee, then you can deduct those payments as wages to employees.  An owner of an LLC can never be considered an employee of the LLC, but an owner of an S-Corporation can be considered an employee of the corporation.

So, if a business owner is paying wages to employees, they can be deducted on the business's return.  This reduces the amount of income that is passed through to the business owner.  Just as a real life example, our business expenses (including wages) are reported on our LLC's Form 1065 as deductible business expenses.  This reduces the amount of income that the firm reports earning, and thus reduces the amount of income that is distributed to each member via a K-1.  If the firm earns $800,000, yet has $500,000 in business expenses, $800,000 is not reported to the owners via the K-1; rather, only $300,000 is reported to the owners via the K-1.

Blah blah FUCKITY blah.   Thanks for the lesson on how business works. 

Simple fact is that "pass through" fucks you in the ass as a business owner.  Even though you don't actually HAVE that money because some paper pushing accountant determines that's what the business "made" then you magically become the EVIL RICH that Obama so hates. 

The point that totally missed your head is that what that paper says has no real bearing on how much disposable income you have.  It may say 800k but you're living on 90.   

Obama still wants all your shit.  Because you're evil. 

[RWS]

I mean, that's what tax brackets are for.

Lower taxes, in general, is better in my opinion. And I don't want to see a gross inequity in percentages (like the bottom 10% paying 1% tax, and the top 10% paying 75% or something crazy like that). But you do realize how tax brackets work, right? For example, using simplified figures as a hypothetical, if Joe the Plumber files single and makes $8,000 a year, he pays 10% of that $8,000 in taxes. If Uncle Pennybags files single and makes $1,000,000, he gets taxed 10% of the first $8,000, 15% from $8,000 to $35,000, 25% of $35k to 80k, 28% of $80k to $170k, 33% of $170k to $370k, and then 35% of the income he makes over $370k. He's not charged 35% of the full million.

Correct. They are marginal rates. But the top end is what we're talking about here. It doesn't change my point a bit. If he's going to raise taxes on one class, he needs to raise it on all. And I understand what tax brackets are for. You're just not understanding what I'm saying. I don't agree with singling out a single specific class of taxpayers and somehow magically deciding that they just aren't pitching in enough. I mean, how did we arrive at this conclusion? What math was involved in the decision? Or are we just eyeballing it? Like I said before, lower everybody, raise everybody, or don't even fuck with it.

I'm all for lowering taxes overall, and even evening out the brackets to be closer to a flat tax. But a pure flat tax, while I love in theory, isn't really fair in practice.

So, let me get this straight. Everybody paying the same rate in taxes isn't fair. But singling out only one very specific bracket to raise taxes on is fair?

[GH2001]

Correct. They are marginal rates. But the top end is what we're talking about here. It doesn't change my point a bit. If he's going to raise taxes on one class, he needs to raise it on all. And I understand what tax brackets are for. You're just not understanding what I'm saying. I don't agree with singling out a single specific class of taxpayers and somehow magically deciding that they just aren't pitching in enough. I mean, how did we arrive at this conclusion? What math was involved in the decision? Or are we just eyeballing it? Like I said before, lower everybody, raise everybody, or don't even fuck with it.
So, let me get this straight. Everybody paying the same rate in taxes isn't fair. But singling out only one very specific bracket to raise taxes on is fair?

Any tax rate that is not apportioned is unconstitutional per our founding documents.  Period.  But......

....the smartasses decided to Add the 16th amendment.

[Vandy Vol]

Blah blah FUCKITY blah.   Thanks for the lesson on how business works.

You're welcome.

Simple fact is that "pass through" fucks you in the ass as a business owner.

Sure, I agree.  But it's mostly due to self-employed individuals having to pay the business's portion of employee withholding as well as the employee's portion.  Your initial explanation made it sound as if self-employed individuals in an LLC or S-Corporation couldn't claim business expenses as deductions to reduce their taxable income when, in actuality, they can.

A Corporation that makes $800,000 and reports $500,000 in deductible expenses will have a taxable income of $300,000.  An LLC that makes $800,000 and reports $500,000 in deductible expenses will have a taxable income of $300,000.  "Paper numbers" or not, it's the same for both types of businesses.

Even though you don't actually HAVE that money because some paper pushing accountant determines that's what the business "made" then you magically become the EVIL RICH that Obama so hates.

Yeah, taxes suck.  And the exorbitant amount of taxes that has to be paid sucks.  But, they are business expenses.  You're supposed to put aside that money for taxes so that you have it to pay in, just like you have to set aside money for overhead expenses so that you have it to pay your bills.

Again, I agree that the amount of taxes that businesses have to pay is absurd.  But this whole "I don't have the money to pay it" stance is silly.  If your business can't afford to pay its bills, its employees, its owner, and its taxes, then it's not a profitable business, and the owner needs to reconsider how he operates his business or whether he even should be operating the business.

Ultimately, your argument regarding high tax rates is one I agree with, but it's currently a requirement that all business owners have to deal with until revenue laws are changed.  It has less to do with accountants and "paper numbers" than it does with exorbitant tax rates on taxable income.

[Kaos]

You're welcome.

Sure, I agree.  But it's mostly due to self-employed individuals having to pay the business's portion of employee withholding as well as the employee's portion.  Your initial explanation made it sound as if self-employed individuals in an LLC or S-Corporation couldn't claim business expenses as deductions to reduce their taxable income when, in actuality, they can.

A Corporation that makes $800,000 and reports $500,000 in deductible expenses will have a taxable income of $300,000.  An LLC that makes $800,000 and reports $500,000 in deductible expenses will have a taxable income of $300,000.  "Paper numbers" or not, it's the same for both types of businesses.

Yeah, taxes suck.  And the exorbitant amount of taxes that has to be paid sucks.  But, they are business expenses.  You're supposed to put aside that money for taxes so that you have it to pay in, just like you have to set aside money for overhead expenses so that you have it to pay your bills.

Again, I agree that the amount of taxes that businesses have to pay is absurd.  But this whole "I don't have the money to pay it" stance is silly.  If your business can't afford to pay its bills, its employees, its owner, and its taxes, then it's not a profitable business, and the owner needs to reconsider how he operates his business or whether he even should be operating the business.

Ultimately, your argument regarding high tax rates is one I agree with, but it's currently a requirement that all business owners have to deal with until revenue laws are changed.  It has less to do with accountants and "paper numbers" than it does with exorbitant tax rates on taxable income.

Jesus Christo. 

The point I'm making is that it's FAKE money.  At the end of the year when the accountant says I "MADE" 800k and Obama singles me out as the EVIL RICH who are hogging this country's wealth when I look at my bank account I damn sure don't have 800k sitting there. 

Yeah I can pay the bills.  I pay my employees. I pay the benefits.  I pay all the expenses.  And I pay the motherfucking taxes.  Tons of motherfucking taxes.  Taxes are essentially my second largest "expense."  The only thing I spend more on is salaries. 

It pisses me off every single time that grinning motherfucker makes some allusion to the rich paying their fair share.  Are you fucking SERIOUS Chairman?  How much more should I pay?   When he talks about raising the rates on anybody who "makes" over 250k, he's including so many small business owners who see paper profits pushed down to their personal returns.  They're not rich.  They're putting their lives on the line every day to keep their businesses going and trying to stay one step ahead of Obama's pack of government wolves who demonize them.

It's a sore subject with me. 

if the IRS vampires would back off say..... 15%?  I would hire two new employees at least one of which I would employ for the specific purpose of generating sales.  if I generate more sales I can hire more people, all of whom pay taxes.  And my taxes will go up due to the rise in income.  Two years from now the tax base would be higher than it is now, employment would be higher than it is now and the economic recovery would be well underway. 

Instead he thinks I should just pay more.  Just paying more will require me to eliminate a position or two.  it will keep me from pursuing additional development.  It will prevent me from increasing my revenues and cause my taxes paid to shrink. 

Raising taxes on the "evil rich" makes sense only to a fucking moron who's never run a business in his life.  Oh wait....

[Vandy Vol]

The point I'm making is that it's FAKE money.  At the end of the year when the accountant says I "MADE" 800k and Obama singles me out as the EVIL RICH who are hogging this country's wealth when I look at my bank account I damn sure don't have 800k sitting there.

Tax rates are determined by taxable income, not gross income.  I would assume that political debates and decisions on tax rates would also be based on taxable income as well, no?

Thus, when they talk about how they're going to raise taxes on businesses that make $250,000 or more, they're not talking about gross income before deductible expenses, as taxes aren't calculated from "fake" gross income figures.  They're talking about taxable income.

Correct?  Or am I missing something?

[AUChizad]

Jesus Christo. 

The point I'm making is that it's FAKE money.  At the end of the year when the accountant says I "MADE" 800k and Obama singles me out as the EVIL RICH who are hogging this country's wealth when I look at my bank account I damn sure don't have 800k sitting there. 

Yeah I can pay the bills.  I pay my employees. I pay the benefits.  I pay all the expenses.  And I pay the motherfucking taxes.  Tons of motherfucking taxes.  Taxes are essentially my second largest "expense."  The only thing I spend more on is salaries. 

It pisses me off every single time that grinning motherfucker makes some allusion to the rich paying their fair share.  Are you fucking SERIOUS Chairman?  How much more should I pay?   When he talks about raising the rates on anybody who "makes" over 250k, he's including so many small business owners who see paper profits pushed down to their personal returns.  They're not rich.  They're putting their lives on the line every day to keep their businesses going and trying to stay one step ahead of Obama's pack of government wolves who demonize them.

It's a sore subject with me. 

if the IRS vampires would back off say..... 15%?  I would hire two new employees at least one of which I would employ for the specific purpose of generating sales.  if I generate more sales I can hire more people, all of whom pay taxes.  And my taxes will go up due to the rise in income.  Two years from now the tax base would be higher than it is now, employment would be higher than it is now and the economic recovery would be well underway. 

Instead he thinks I should just pay more.  Just paying more will require me to eliminate a position or two.  it will keep me from pursuing additional development.  It will prevent me from increasing my revenues and cause my taxes paid to shrink. 

Raising taxes on the "evil rich" makes sense only to a fucking moron who's never run a business in his life.  Oh wait....

You know you're replying to the owner of an LLC in this post, right?

Also, show me a link where Obama used the term "evil rich" you keep putting in quotations. Sounds like you're getting overly defensive.

And Obama invented taxes? Or even raised income taxes once? He has recently proposed a tax plan that doesn't affect me or anyone I know. Like, VandyVol, I can agree that the way businesses are taxed is somewhat unfair, but A) it's not as bad as you're painting it, and B) Obama didn't invent the tax structure.

Again, you're pointing your finger to Obama like he has done something insanely radical with the tax structure. Like taxes were his idea. This is exactly the kind of thing the article in the original post is about.

[Kaos]

Tax rates are determined by taxable income, not gross income.  I would assume that political debates and decisions on tax rates would also be based on taxable income as well, no?

Thus, when they talk about how they're going to raise taxes on businesses that make $250,000 or more, they're not talking about gross income before deductible expenses, as taxes aren't calculated from "fake" gross income figures.  They're talking about taxable income.

Correct?  Or am I missing something?

I've been running my own business for 11 years.  I know the difference between gross and taxable. 

The point I am trying to make is that the taxable income the accountants come up with has no actual relational bearing to the amount of cash you may or may not have on hand. 

It's not as simple as "income minus expenses" because not all expenses can be deducted.  Only portions of others can. 

Ask a regular employee what they "make" and they can tell you their gross salary and their take home pay. 

Ask a business owner what they "make" and they can tell you what they take home and then have to get some other arbitrary (and yes, I know how it's calculated) other number from their accountant.   That number bears no resemblance to either number their employee can recite. 

And when Obama singles out the "evil rich" he's talking about all of us who have a business and bring over $250K in "fake" money that is calculated by accountants.   He says it as if we "MAKE" $250k. 

But the reality is that we don't.  I know a lot of business owners.  Guys who show hundreds of thousands on their K1.  But is that reality?  Can they spend that money?  Is it theirs?  Not if they want the business to continue.  Not if they don't want to go to jail.  But they're all considered the evil rich by Obama and his class warfare stormtroopers.

Simple point and I'm done.  If I actually had the money that my last five K1's showed?  TJ Yeldon would still be coming to Auburn.   

As for Chizad... I was referring to Obama as never having run a business in his life.  He hasn't. 

It's exactly as bad as I'm painting it.  I write the fucking checks every quarter.  I know what it looks like.  I know what it looks like down to the nickel.  My painting is Norman Rockwell clear.   

I never said that The Chairman invented tax or made it what it is today.  Yeah, I object to where we are.  Don't blame him for that.  What I object to more is the characterization of "the rich" and the constant demands from Obama that "the rich" pay more than we're already paying.  How many different ways does he have to say it?  It's the cornerstone of his entire agenda.  Take from those who do, give to those who don't.   When you're taking 1/3 of what I make?  That's by damn enough.  Don't fucking ask for more. 

[Vandy Vol]

The point I am trying to make is that the taxable income the accountants come up with has no actual relational bearing to the amount of cash you may or may not have on hand. 

It's not as simple as "income minus expenses" because not all expenses can be deducted.  Only portions of others can.

The vast majority are deductible, but yes, there are those that aren't.  Of those non-deductible expenses, though, how many are ultimately covered by your personal standard deduction of $5,700?

The only partially deductible expenses that I can think of are gifts and meals.  Technically, home office and vehicle expenses are considered partially deductible expenses, but that's because one has to typically separate your personal usage from your business usage of vehicles and the home.  Technically, 100% of the business portion of those expenses are deductible.

And as far as non-deductible business expenses?  Again, the only ones I can think of are penalties/fines, donations to political parties/lobbying expenses, social club dues, and bribes.  Hell, even a BBB membership is deductible.

Just out of curiosity, what else are you not able to deduct?

[CCTAU]

And when Obama singles out the "evil rich" he's talking about all of us who have a business and bring over $250K in "fake" money that is calculated by accountants.   He says it as if we "MAKE" $250k. 

Simple minded people don't get this. They all think you are the rich bastard that got lucky and made "ALL THAT MONEY" when you don't really make as much as most.

And then other dumbasses try to explain it away.

Your statement about hiring more people is exactly why the "RICH" business owners should pay LESS taxes.

But alas, these little bastards that didn't get out of college making 200k are all pissed off about those of us who worked our way up.

Bottom line is, you tax the rich, you take away jobs.

[Kaos]

The vast majority are deductible, but yes, there are those that aren't.  Of those non-deductible expenses, though, how many are ultimately covered by your personal standard deduction of $5,700?

The only partially deductible expenses that I can think of are gifts and meals.  Technically, home office and vehicle expenses are considered partially deductible expenses, but that's because one has to typically separate your personal usage from your business usage of vehicles and the home.  Technically, 100% of the business portion of those expenses are deductible.

And as far as non-deductible business expenses?  Again, the only ones I can think of are penalties/fines, donations to political parties/lobbying expenses, social club dues, and bribes.  Hell, even a BBB membership is deductible.

Just out of curiosity, what else are you not able to deduct?

$5700?  Are you shitting me? 

That doesn't cover a month. 

I'm not going to go through my tax returns line by line.   

I'll try to make this as simple as I possibly can.  Suppose I get my K1 and after expenses and deductions it shows I "made" $XXX,XXX last year.   That is a fake number.  Because things are rolling from one year to the next, credits from this apply to that, etc.  It's not nearly as simple as you're trying to make it in my case.  It's not a matter of cash in minus cash out and bizzam! there's your profit.  If it was that easy I wouldn't have to pay accountants fucktons of money to sort it out. 

You can take that $XXX,XXX number the accountant provides, that number that is the taxable business income that slides onto my personal tax return and puts a target on my back for the Obama hounds and then look at my monthly bank statements.  At no time during the year do I have $XXX,XXX in the bank. 

 But the perception people have when they hear that smug bastard talk about the "rich" needing to pay more is that people actually have "all that money" at their disposal.  They think that at the end of every year that $XXX,XXX number is what we put in our pockets.  It's not even close. 

My employees are the same.  It's why I don't let them see the business returns. 

[Kaos]

Simple minded people don't get this. They all think you are the rich bastard that got lucky and made "ALL THAT MONEY" when you don't really make as much as most.

And then other dumbasses try to explain it away.

Your statement about hiring more people is exactly why the "RICH" business owners should pay LESS taxes.

But alas, these little bastards that didn't get out of college making 200k are all pissed off about those of us who worked our way up.

Bottom line is, you tax the rich, you take away jobs.

At least somebody gets it. 

[AUChizad]

Bottom line is, you tax the rich, you take away jobs.

when it comes down to brass tax (no pun intended) I agree with this statement.

[Vandy Vol]

$5700?  Are you shitting me? 

That doesn't cover a month.

Total expenses, no, it wouldn't.  I'm talking about non-deductible or partially deductible expenses only.  There just aren't that many of them, so I'm trying to figure out what exactly it is that you're stating can't be deducted that's making such a big difference in your reported income after expenses and your actual income after expenses.

Virtually every business expense is deductible.  There was less than $200 that we were unable to claim this year, and that was due to only being able to deduct 50% of business meals with clients or other professionals.

I'm not calling you a liar or trying to poke holes in your posts; I'm just trying to figure out what it is that you are not able to claim, because the I.R.C. doesn't make very many business expenses non-deductible.

[Kaos]

Total expenses, no, it wouldn't.  I'm talking about non-deductible or partially deductible expenses only.  There just aren't that many of them, so I'm trying to figure out what exactly it is that you're stating can't be deducted that's making such a big difference in your reported income after expenses and your actual income after expenses.

Virtually every business expense is deductible.  There was less than $200 that we were unable to claim this year, and that was due to only being able to deduct 50% of business meals with clients or other professionals.

I'm not calling you a liar or trying to poke holes in your posts; I'm just trying to figure out what it is that you are not able to claim, because the I.R.C. doesn't make very many business expenses non-deductible.

You can have that discussion with my accountant.   I'm not a two or three man shop.  Lots of employees, multiple locations and all kinds of shit.   My situation isn't unusual.  When I go to conferences or meetings I hear business owners from all walks of life making similar complaints. 

Do you really think that when I spend $50,000 on a server I can just go to my tax form and wipe $50k from the income column?